Pragmatic Leftist Theory
The neolibs are too far right. The tankies are doing whatever that is. Where's the space for the people who want fully-automated-luxury-gay-space-communism, but realize that it's gonna take a while and there are lots of steps between now and then? Here. This is that space.
Here, people should endeavor to discuss and devise practical, actionable leftist action. Vote lesser evil while you build grassroots coalitions. Unionize your workplace. Participate in SRAs. Build cohesion your local community. Educate the proletariat.
This is a place for practical people to develop practical plans to implement stable, incremental improvement.
If you're dead-set on drumming up all 18,453 True Leftists® into spontaneous Revolution, go somewhere else. The grown ups are talking.
Rules:
-1. Don't be a dick. Racism, sexism, other assorted bigotries, you know the drill. At least try to default to mutually respectful discussion. We're all on the same side here, unless you aren't, in which case kindly leave.
-2. Don't be a tankie. Yes I'm sure you have an extensive knowledge of century-old theory. There's been a century of history since then. Things didn't shake out as expected, maybe consider the possibility that a different angle of attack might be more effective in light of new data.
-3. Be practical. No one on the left benefits from counterproductive actions. This is a space informed by, not enslaved to, ideology. Promoting actions that are fundamentally untenable in the system in question, because they fulfill a sense of ideological purity, is a bad look. Don't do that.
view the rest of the comments
A general strike is a massive commitment for a country that hasn't had one since 1946, and, for that matter, would seem to me to be a tool for acquiring more concrete demands.
On the whole, I generally dislike timetables. There are years in which nothing happens, and weeks in which years happen, as the saying goes (Lenin, I think?). There will be moments to be seized as time goes ahead, and there will be unexpected setbacks, and trying to constrain either to a timetable will damage efforts - either by overcaution/underutilization of the moment, or by sapping morale from not reaching timeline 'goals'.
More generally, I would say that, going forward, the two most important aspects are agitating for unionization and shifting safe and moderately-contested seats to progressive challengers by primary participation - assuming, of course, that elections matter going forward, which is... not as certain as I would like it to be. Midterm elections are unlikely to mean much - even a sweeping Dem victory would ultimately not do much more than unfuck the budget going forward - due to the Trump regime's reliance on extralegal methods of rulemaking and enforcement. I think my opposition to third-party votes going into the 2026 midterms has more to do with how immensely shitty the only big third parties in the US are.
I would say that the focus up towards 2028 should overwhelmingly be towards the support of extant progressive politicians (in the hope of cinching the nomination in the Dem 2028 primaries) and work towards progressives in local elections to help the progress(ha) of those politicians to higher office, and that a progressive success in 2028 is both more valuable and more likely, as progressive demographics which are harder to get out during midterms are more likely to vote during a presidential election - if there is an electoral victory available, it is here.
However, I must qualify this with personal experience in closely following local government: many of the issues in local government are not clear-cut progressive-conservative split issues, and many of them are founded on immensely fucked legal and economic knots. This is not to discourage progressives from running, only to warn that local politics often have a much more technocratic, bureaucratic, and personality-oriented tint to them, and that decisions made, even from a progressive position, may not do much to convince people of progressivism itself. God, you ever been in a town hall where folk are arguing over recycling because the only recycling company in town is a fucking joke, so you have folk who are progressives arguing for abolishing recycling, and local conservatives arguing that it's good for local businesses, and vice-versa on both sides? Insane shite. Doubly so when municipalities often run on a shoestring budget.
Point there is just that there is that progressives going into local government should be aware of that much more detail and compromise-oriented bend - many of the precepts we work on are concerned with national or state-scale government; there are fewer opportunities - though certainly not no opportunities - for strict progressive policies.
My one disagreement is that timetables get people moving in a specific direction. If the timetable has to be extended, or shortened, with new developments, so be it. I presented a timetable (and a particularly optimistic one at that) to consider the feasibility of a course of action, and approximately how long such a course would take to yield results.
Yes a failed milestone can be disheartening, but the momentum has the potential to carry enthusiasm regardless. The way I see it, the discourse as it stands is too vague, concerned more with romantic idealism than specific, coordinated action. A timeline creates urgency and immediate direction, which are valuable features for the cause.
Well said, though in truth my primary goal with winning local office is less about direct action at that level (though that is also a desired effect) and more about building a roster that can be gradually elevated to higher office.